[c-nsp] what is it with 3550s?
Jon Lewis
jlewis at lewis.org
Mon Feb 22 12:50:30 EST 2010
On Sun, 21 Feb 2010, TCIS List Acct wrote:
> We've got a boatload of 3550-EMI's (for colo/server aggregation duties) and
> are looking at replacing them in the next 12-24 months The C3750G-24/48-E
> series seem to be a good upgrade path (all gig ports, layer3 routing, IPv6
> support, fairly easy to source on the used market) -- curious as to why you
> said they didn't look viable...
I haven't played with the 3750 line, but assuming it's similar in software
to the 3560, the trouble with them (vs the 3550), particularly in a
colo/server aggregation setup, is a serious lack of flexibility in
per-port policing.
With the 3550, you can use input/output service-policy to police each port
to arbitrary bandwidh. If you want to limit a customer to 2mbit/s in both
directions, it's trivial to do.
With the newer switches, cisco no longer supports per-port egress
policing. Instead, you have srr-queue bandwidth limit [10-90], which
limits the egress port speed to 10-90% of physical speed. i.e. srr-queue
bandwidth 10 on a 100mbit port results in 10mbit/s. That would be the
lowest "policed" rate you can configure for egress. If you can live with
that, then it's not so bad, because you can come up with the %'s for all
the other rates you'd want to limit ports to.
Also, because the egress bandwidth limit is configured for the "whole
port" you can't use service-policy and ACLs to police some traffic but not
other, or police certain types of traffic to different rates on the same
port.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Jon Lewis | I route
Senior Network Engineer | therefore you are
Atlantic Net |
_________ http://www.lewis.org/~jlewis/pgp for PGP public key_________
More information about the cisco-nsp
mailing list